Author Topic: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018  (Read 30285 times)

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #150 on: November 18, 2016, 05:44:41 PM »
Quote
Amid issues of economic depression, world war, torture, nuclear proliferation, climate change, Zika, and resurgent hate crimes, what really makes this group of otherwise intelligent people poo their pants and howl at the moon in rage is the idea that a few bigots might imagine themselves to be "acceptable."

Because Trump is a blowhard and a bully and  bullheaded, and no one know what he will do.  We all have our guesses, and we may all believe we know, but he is so impulsive we really don't. :(

So when someone who is sympathetic to bigots has his ear, that person may suggest something to Trump and Trump might go for it.  Like house-to-house searches for illegal aliens.  Interment camps for muslims.  Declaring illegal immigrants have no Constitutional protections because they are not citizens.  Stupid, unconstitutional stuff like that.  Sure, the courts will shut him down as soon as they can, but who knows how much damage he could do before he is forced to stop.  And he believes all sorts of stupid stuff, like "clean coal."  From what we've seen, convincing him of something that is obviously untrue (birtherism) ain't that hard.

So when he had an advisor who has no problem publishing arguments that are untrue and bigoted--how far will it be before some of those arguments reaches Trump's ear, and he acts on them?  :'(

Trump strikes me as a man who is mainly concerned with business and making money for himself.  That is probably his main goal for his Presidency.  But he is certainly not concerned with racial or religious equality.  And I don't see it being a very big step for him to throw those American values under the bus if he can achieve his primary goals.  Especially if he has some advisors who find those concerns equally irrelevant.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #151 on: November 18, 2016, 05:52:09 PM »
everything that you just said is reasonably defensible, Wayward. with one howling exception.  The word "because" prefacing it all.   There is no causal connection between my observation and your reply. None that I can see.


Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #152 on: November 21, 2016, 11:17:04 AM »
everything that you just said is reasonably defensible, Wayward. with one howling exception.  The word "because" prefacing it all.   There is no causal connection between my observation and your reply. None that I can see.

Are you saying, Pete, that racial equality and civil rights are not on the same level as economic depression, world war, the Zika virus and climate change?  (Obviously, resurgent hate crimes are related, since empowered bigots who think they are now "acceptable" are more likely to commit such crimes.)  That they are so far less important that we should ignore any loss of these rights, since we have more pressing problems to address?  ???

If that is what you are saying, then, in one sense, you are right.  I would much rather lose civil rights than to have climate keep rising, or a nuclear war, or every pregnant woman give birth to a Zika baby.  These are extremely serious problems that must be addressed.

But in another sense, you can't be more wrong.  Because it isn't an either/or situation.  We should be worried about climate change, world war, the Zika virus, economic depression AND racial equality and loss of civil rights.  Of an Administration that thinks that racial equality is simply a thing that doesn't exist and it doesn't need to worry about.  Because there are those who do think about it and are trying to make the situation worse, trying to make sure their group retains all the advantages and that no other group has them.  And if the government doesn't oppose them, or worse, helps them, then this whole country will be worse off in many ways. 

We will be more divided, more hostile to each other, and less united in addressing other concerns, like climate change, preventing world wars, and making our economy stronger.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #153 on: November 21, 2016, 11:26:05 AM »
Look back at what you said "because" to.

Loss of civil rights is not co terminous with the spectre of bigots imagining themselves "acceptable."

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #154 on: November 21, 2016, 11:56:52 AM »
everything that you just said is reasonably defensible, Wayward. with one howling exception.  The word "because" prefacing it all.   There is no causal connection between my observation and your reply. None that I can see.

Are you saying, Pete, that racial equality and civil rights are not on the same level as economic depression, world war, the Zika virus and climate change?  (Obviously, resurgent hate crimes are related, since empowered bigots who think they are now "acceptable" are more likely to commit such crimes.)  That they are so far less important that we should ignore any loss of these rights, since we have more pressing problems to address?  ??

Just which "civil rights" are we talking about losing here in all of this?

Are we talking about the "right to buy homosexual wedding cakes" or freedom of association/religion?

Or are talking about rights that are already protected under criminal law? You know, the right to not be physically assaulted. The right not to be killed by homicidal(/&homophobic/&racist)maniacs. And so forth?

I'm pretty sure the full range of the criminal codes are going to be more stringently enforced under Trump then they were under Obama.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #155 on: November 21, 2016, 01:52:28 PM »
Quote
Look back at what you said "because" to.

Loss of civil rights is not co terminous with the spectre of bigots imagining themselves "acceptable."

Quote
Just which "civil rights" are we talking about losing here in all of this?

Are we talking about the "right to buy homosexual wedding cakes" or freedom of association/religion?

Or are talking about rights that are already protected under criminal law? You know, the right to not be physically assaulted. The right not to be killed by homicidal(/&homophobic/&racist)maniacs. And so forth?

How about the right not to discriminated against based on race, religion, sex or sexual orientation?

How long before someone says that they don't need to rent to a person, sell to a person, or allow in a public place a person because they are of the wrong race, religion, sex or sexual orientation and there are "separate but equal" (i.e. other) facilities they can use?  That the hovel down the street is just as good as the nice apartment they are renting?

While I respect a person's religious beliefs, just how different is not selling them a cake from not selling them food, or renting them a house, or allowing them in their schools?

What makes you think Jeff Sessions is going to vigorously defend those who are discriminated against because of race or religion?  And if he doesn't do so, what makes you think President Trump is going to order him to do so?

Or is it more likely that they will turn a blind eye to these things, say it is the individual right of the owners to discriminate against anyone they want, and if the person doesn't like it, they go somewhere else--like Africa? ;) 

Quote
I'm pretty sure the full range of the criminal codes are going to be more stringently enforced under Trump then they were under Obama.

Based on what, Daemon?  Because he wants the police to crack down on protesters--excuse me, "rioters," because out of 200 people walking peacefully, one or two broke the law?

Do you think he will crack down on armed assailants taking over government property, like in Oregon?  Or flagrantly ignoring Federal law on land use of Federal property?  Or using water cannons to break up protesters in the sub-freezing weather in North Dakota?  Or would you expect him to being even more lax than Obama?

I expect him to be more "law and order" for crimes that are normally enforced (such as those against the poor and minorities), but less enforcement against those that are less enforced (such as those against the rich and those in power).

And, of course, I expect at least one or two in Trump's Administration being convicted of crimes themselves.  Which, I suppose, means he will enforce crimes more than Obama, although he will be one of those vigorously defending them. :)

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #156 on: November 21, 2016, 02:27:34 PM »
Just love arguments that misstate the facts.

"While I respect a person's religious beliefs, just how different is not selling them a cake from not selling them food, or renting them a house, or allowing them in their schools"

"Selling a cake,",yes.  Custom making a cake otoh steps on Freedom of the Press and Freedom of speech as well as freedom of religion.

Would you require a jewish cake maker to write stuff on a wedding cake that celebrates the "clean" unuon of two "pure-blood Aryans"?

« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 02:29:42 PM by Pete at Home »

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #157 on: November 21, 2016, 03:36:47 PM »
So their objection to making the cake was only the lettering of the cake?  ???

So if the cake had no writing on it, you believe that they would be in the wrong?

It's a fine line between not joining in with someone else's morality and trying to force them to adhere to yours.  This is pretty close to that line.

(BTW, I myself would have argued Freedom of Association for the couple.)

But please be more explicit on how different it is from selling someone a cake with some writing on it, and refusing to sell them the cake itself, and refusing to sell them the eggs and flour to bake a cake?  All of them have the same effect--to try to prevent what they consider immoral behavior based on religion.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #158 on: November 21, 2016, 03:49:00 PM »
But please be more explicit on how different it is from selling someone a cake with some writing on it, and refusing to sell them the cake itself, and refusing to sell them the eggs and flour to bake a cake?  All of them have the same effect--to try to prevent what they consider immoral behavior based on religion.

Do recall that the issue wasn't willingness to sell, but willingness to create a custom product. Within that context I don't think it would make all that much of a difference whether the Jewish baker had been asked to bake a cake for Nazis with writing or without writing. For some curious reason the specificity of the issue always gets system restored back to "won't sell a cake" whenever someone dredges up the topic again. To date I don't think I've heard of a case falling under this recent 'religious freedoms' issue where a merchant refused to sell a pre-made product to someone based on their beliefs/orientation/race.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #159 on: November 21, 2016, 05:07:29 PM »
For some curious reason the specificity of the issue always gets system restored back to "won't sell a cake" whenever someone dredges up the topic again. To date I don't think I've heard of a case falling under this recent 'religious freedoms' issue where a merchant refused to sell a pre-made product to someone based on their beliefs/orientation/race.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/15/502111408/washington-state-court-case-religious-liberty-versus-anti-discrimination

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-couple-fined-13000-for-refusing-to-host-same-sex-wedding-at-their

http://www.christianpost.com/news/calif-caterer-refuses-to-do-gay-wedding-based-on-christian-beliefs-i-hope-you-appreciate-my-honesty-112281/

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/659484/Mississippi-law-refuse-service-gay-couples
« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 05:11:13 PM by DonaldD »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #160 on: November 21, 2016, 05:28:07 PM »
Quote
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/15/502111408/washington-state-court-case-religious-liberty-versus-anti-discrimination

he asked the couple's long-time florist, Arlene's Flowers, to do arrangements for their upcoming wedding.

Quote
Quote
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-couple-fined-13000-for-refusing-to-host-same-sex-wedding-at-their

The New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) has ruled that the Roman Catholic owners of an Albany-area farm violated the civil rights of a lesbian couple when they declined to host the couple’s same-sex “marriage” ceremony in 2012.

Quote
Quote
http://www.christianpost.com/news/calif-caterer-refuses-to-do-gay-wedding-based-on-christian-beliefs-i-hope-you-appreciate-my-honesty-112281/

Kama Kaina and Mathew Rivera, a same-sex couple of four years, reportedly contacted Janet Zimmerman Catering back in November to request her services at their upcoming gay marriage ceremony in Big Bear, Calif. in June 2014.
Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/calif-caterer-refuses-to-do-gay-wedding-based-on-christian-beliefs-i-hope-you-appreciate-my-honesty-112281/#yrKagY5O6l48Me5o.99

Quote
Quote
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/659484/Mississippi-law-refuse-service-gay-couples

Republican Governor Phil Bryant argued the law is targeted at preventing government interference "in the lives of the people".

It is not only shops and services who are now allowed to refuse to serve gay couples, but the law also protects business who refuse to provide goods, services or facilities for gay weddings due to religious or moral objections.

The first three are irrelevant to my point since they consist either of providing services or hosting. The issue has always been about whether a person can be compelled to provide a service; this is nothing new. WS, above, was mischaracterizing the issue as being about refusal to sell goods.

The last link, however, while not pertaining to a case (which was what my post was about) is indeed about a law that would permit refusal of service, including selling of goods. However I don't know anything about how that law is intended to be implemented, and what standards of "religious reasons" can be used as the basis for refusal. I doubt it is a carte blanche to refuse anything to anyone on any pretext; although if that is actually what it is it will probably be struck down. Again, so far I've not heard of a case of a vendor refusing to sell pre-made goods to people for this kind of reason. It's always been about requesting services from people who don't want to provide that service.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #161 on: November 21, 2016, 06:22:26 PM »
I'm always exceedingly torn by the "bake a cake" argument. As a person who likes the "rational consumer" model of economics, these things are not really supposed to persist. If Cake King refuses to bake a gay cake, then this should spur competition to capitalize on the opportunity. They open just down the street, get tons of great press, and a solid advantage (assuming that non-bigots outnumber bigots in the area). Cake King gets demolished on social media, ratings systems, and eventually sees that this was a poor economic decision. To preserve the integrity of their views, they hire a part time guy to write "Congrats Adam and Steve" on the cake and everyone wins.

Unfortunately it just doesn't seem to work out that way in real life. So then we're left with lawsuits and other mechanisms by the force of a gun to remedy the situation. I don't have a "so therefore" kind of conclusion or summary. I think it isn't easy, however. I also think that deciding who is a protected group and who is not tends to be a little problematic. If the couple seeking a wedding cake run a haberdashery and the bakers come into the shop, can they refuse service? Can you refuse service to a person wearing a Donald Trump hat? What if its a Hijab instead?


Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #162 on: November 21, 2016, 07:47:44 PM »
So their objection to making the cake was only the lettering of the cake?  ???

So if the cake had no writing on it, you believe that they would be in the wrong?

If it's a pre-designed cake that baker has made for any other couple, then baker is stuck without an argument.

But no, it's not just writing   Nor would writing of "congratulations" suffice to give baker right to say no.

Any artistic/creative effort forced on baker against his political religious or even semantic beliefs, violates freedom of speech and of the press.  A baker should be able to take Jan 20 off from work, and absolutely refuse to decorate a cake with "happy birthday Adolf Hitler" regardless of said baker's religion or ethnicity. It putting pictures or symbols on the cake to communicate the same.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #163 on: November 21, 2016, 08:30:48 PM »
How is that different from a meal that is cooked to order at a restaurant?

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #164 on: November 21, 2016, 09:18:09 PM »
How is that different from a meal that is cooked to order at a restaurant?

If you show up at a vegan/kosher/halal restaurant, order a veggie burger, then take some bacon out of your pocket and eat it at the table, you very likely may be asked to leave.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #165 on: November 21, 2016, 09:28:06 PM »
What if my special friend and I gaily walk into a local diner and we ask to split an order for a burger rare with blue cheese, jalapenos and a dab of saffron mayonnaise?  If they don't have it they don't have it, but if they can make it and refuse while the het hunk at the next table orders scrambled eggs with crab meat and bechamel sauce and they run out to get the ingredients and he gets it, I think I should be able to win a lawsuit on Constitutional grounds.  I know where to get that kind of burger locally, but I'm not sure everyone would have the success I would.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #166 on: November 21, 2016, 09:42:50 PM »
Oh, we've gotten to hypotheticals now?

I didn't want to bring this up because of the painful memories but what if you work legally as a male prostitute in Nevada and you only provide your services to women while refusing gay men?

Should that be illegal under federal law?

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #167 on: November 21, 2016, 09:54:43 PM »
Depends on what you think the meaning and purpose of anti-discrimination laws are meant to be.  Why do you think my hypothetical doesn't apply?  I need to know if everyone else's rights are comparable to yours.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #168 on: November 21, 2016, 10:06:57 PM »
What if my special friend and I gaily walk into a local diner and we ask to split an order for a burger rare with blue cheese, jalapenos and a dab of saffron mayonnaise?  If they don't have it they don't have it, but if they can make it and refuse while the het hunk at the next table orders scrambled eggs with crab meat and bechamel sauce and they run out to get the ingredients and he gets it, I think I should be able to win a lawsuit on Constitutional grounds. 

I should hope not.  Are those the parrochial Michigan stereotypes for what gay people eat?  I grew up in Europe and am startled that Saffron is considered gay in your neck of the woods.  Also, sharing a burger between two people isn't constitutionally protected.

Incidentally, I was banned from one bar for expressing my opinion that Barack Obama was not "the Antichrist".and not the Messiah either, and it never occurred to me that I had legal recourse.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #169 on: November 21, 2016, 10:32:53 PM »
Al, I suspect that most gay cooks in this world would agree with me that your hypo trods on a cook's artistic license in his or her own kitchen.  I think that hypo is actually much weaker on the facts for your case, than the wedding cake one that we were discussing

Still, this is a real conversation and you and the rest of us are really engaging the issues with these sample facts so that's cool.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #170 on: November 21, 2016, 11:06:53 PM »
Also, proceeding on another axis of sexual deviation from "norm", does a wedding photographer get sued for refusing to photograph the collaring and stripping of a bride at a BDSM themed ceremony?


I think it's a lot easier to maintain the lines where they have been sine Heart of Atlanta and such cases, I.e. housing hotels and generic products cannot be sold in a discriminatory way, but discrimination laws cannot trample on artistic freedom, freedom of speech or of religious practice (including what is done with a religious facility or religious service.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #171 on: November 21, 2016, 11:18:43 PM »
Cherry, in theory, a Nevada legal prostitute is a contract employee and the brothels are supposed to be banned from advertising across county lines.  So they are told at least that they can discriminate as they please.  A legal prostitute is told that she or he has the right to discriminate by race, sex, or whatever.  So the gqblts &etcs (apparently new letters have migrated to the string) are demanding legal entitlements that have never applied to racial discrimination.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #172 on: November 22, 2016, 06:22:28 AM »
Pete, if my hypothetical is (intentionally) absurd, how is it different from the cake scenario?  Maybe the restaurant would have run out to get saffron if they didn't know I was gay, as they would be willing to go get nutmeg for the bechamel sauce for the guy groping his girlfriend at the next table.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #173 on: November 24, 2016, 08:55:16 AM »
So the gqblts &etcs (apparently new letters have migrated to the string) are demanding legal entitlements that have never applied to racial discrimination.

Evidently, near as I can tell, it is "LGBTQI+" now, but that was last week according to someone else, and I don't know how current he was on their lingo. (Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Trangendered/Queer/Intersexed/"and others")

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #174 on: November 24, 2016, 09:03:24 AM »
Also, proceeding on another axis of sexual deviation from "norm", does a wedding photographer get sued for refusing to photograph the collaring and stripping of a bride at a BDSM themed ceremony?

I think a Wedding Photographer has already been subjected to a legal challenge after refusing to photograph a Gay Wedding, citing "artistic expression" as well as freedom of religion. Since the photographer did not believe in, or support gay marriage on religious grounds. The photographer felt, "as an Artist" that (s)he would "be unable to provide satisfactory (artistic) service" and thus declined.

The gay couple filed suit.

I guess if I was the photographer I would have reiterated the comment about not be enamored with the shoot, get them to sign a document acknowledging such, and then created one of the most epicly bad wedding photo sets ever.... And make sure it's done in a subtle enough way they can't prove in court that it was malicious.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #175 on: November 24, 2016, 11:45:50 AM »
Same question as my noble predecessor AI Wessex asked, chefs are artists of a different sort, but not much different from a pastry/cake chef.  Can they refuse to serve a gay customer if s/he requests to leave the mushrooms out of the risotto?  Note this is different from a pharmacist refusing to sell a commodity to a customer, which should never be allowed to happen.  Odd that recent court tests rule in favor of the pharmacist and against the pastry chef.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #176 on: November 24, 2016, 02:34:43 PM »
While cooking may be an "art" cooking a previously set menu is not "art" or at least, it isn't "original art." Even if the recipe in question was their own creation. While the Chef may have a Freedom of Association/Religion claim they could assert, as far as their service is concerned, it revolves around their ability to perform a specified task in accordance with specified instructions.

Of course, that being said, there is cooking the food, and then there is presenting the food. Much in line with the photographer above, and why I'd personally not push to get a service provider to render services they've told me they don't want to provide me. After all, taking pictures is just point and shoot right? Well, there is a bit of difference between a professional photo and an amateur one, using the right exposure settings(with the right equipment), getting ideal focal lengths for what is being pictured, creating or otherwise working with existing lighting conditions, "framing the picture" and so on. Any one of those things, when just a little bit off, can turn a great picture into just a good one(or "lucking into" the reverse in the case of a amateur getting a great photo instead of just a good one).

So the Chef could perfectly select the ingredients, and perfectly cook the foods, but when it comes time to present the finished product, he half-asses the presentation, or deliberately screws with it. So while the food may otherwise be cooked to perfection, it looks like complete s___. Which is where a LOT of the artistry of cooking happens, but if you've told them that their personal views as an artist don't matter, well....

But this also goes back their claim as both professionals and artists, they probably take great pride in their work, and they don't to present anybody with what they think would be a sub-par product. So when they say they don't think they'd be able to perform to their usual standard on a given project or task, it's probably a good idea to heed the warning and let them reject the work.

Which takes us back to the bakery, cooking a cake doesn't take a lot of artistry(robots can, and now do, often bake cakes), but decorating it with original work does involve a human, and "Artistic" touch. If you want a cake, by all means buy a cake. If you want original work done, once again, you probably should avoid the "artist" who is warning you that they "don't think they'd be able to perform to the usual standard" in regards to meeting your request.

Heck I have a sister that used to decorate cakes for a grocery store at one point, its a skill she retains decades later and still uses on occasion. The skill isn't THAT rare, every grocery store in the country probably trains 1 to 6 people a year in how to do so. She also often does skip the "bake the cake" step by opting to get one from a store, and then providing the customization herself.

The internet is a wonderful thing these days, finding a cake decorator, rather than someone to bake the cake and decorate it, is probably far easier today than any time in history. So yes, on the bakery, the breakdown becomes: Yes, they have the right to refuse to decorate a cake in certain specified ways. No, they do not have right to simply refuse to sell a cake on any grounds other than inability of the customer to pay for it, or other more specific causes that are widely accepted reasons for refusing service. (No shirt, no shoes, no service; walking in while waving a gun around, etc)

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #177 on: November 24, 2016, 02:38:24 PM »
Quote
While cooking may be an "art" cooking a previously set menu is not "art" or at least, it isn't "original art." Even if the recipe in question was their own creation. While the Chef may have a Freedom of Association/Religion claim they could assert, as far as their service is concerned, it revolves around their ability to perform a specified task in accordance with specified instructions.
I can't see how "cooking" is different from baking.  Both use recipes and add individual touches.  I've been to cake shops and been shown a gallery of cake sizes and shapes, as well as to restaurants and had the waiter describe the specials of the day.  Either both are art or neither is.  Hold the mushrooms and the jimmies, please.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #178 on: November 24, 2016, 02:54:51 PM »
I can't see how "cooking" is different from baking.  Both use recipes and add individual touches.  I've been to cake shops and been shown a gallery of cake sizes and shapes, as well as to restaurants and had the waiter describe the specials of the day.  Either both are art or neither is.  Hold the mushrooms and the jimmies, please.

There are chef's out there that are extremely particular about how, and what they'll prepare. They WILL take the suggestion cook to things a certain (different) way as a personal insult to them, or an insult to the food, if not both. The most immediate example would be going to 5 star chef, ordering an extremely high tier of steak, and asking them to cook it until its "well done." Best case, if you're there to see it, they're probably going to grimace, worst case you're going to get yelled at and possibly have things thrown at you or even get thrown out.

There is cooking, and then there is cooking, and do not confuse the two. Kind of like there are cars, and then there are cars. If you can't tell the difference between a Ford Pinto and an Ashton Martin DB11, there's not much that can be done for you.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #179 on: November 24, 2016, 03:04:22 PM »
I think what Al...sorry, Kasandra (with one S) is getting at is "where is the line" dividing services offered from goods sold. Of course, I'm sure this line of reasoning is meant to demonstrate that since the line may be undefined at present that therefore there should be no line and therefore no religious grounds to decline to offer services.

Putting aside that implied line, I do think some decisions would have to be made regarding what is a 'special' or 'custom' service versus what is the rendering of a good. Buying frozen food at a grocery store may require the cashier to render the 'service' of cashing out the order, and yet we are hopefully not discussing the case of whether a cashier should be able to refuse to cash out an order for someone based on their sexual orientation. Almost all retail sales require some sort of 'service' in order to process the order, so I think we can discount all of these that involve buying standard products. The word "standard" is, I think, the important qualifier here, as certain businesses, such as restaurants, do offer an array of standard products; i.e. the menu. It is not even debatable that these products are offered - also as standard - with certain variations when possible. For instance, if someone allergic to peppers orders their pasta sans peppers, it is not controversial that it will be almost automatic that the chef will comply. The exceptional case would be one where a chef will not comply with customer requests of this type, and such cases almost should be the ones where a blanket rule is stated, such as we will sometimes see on a menu in the form of "no substitutions". So yes, a restaurant making a dish without one of the ingredients based on customer request is not a 'custom' or 'special' service, but is a standard good offered. It's more or less the equivalent of taking in your dry cleaning and asking them not to use bleach on a white shirt. It's a specification, but not a custom service.

The different case could be where a person goes into a restaurant and tries to order something not on the menu, knowing it's within the technical capability of the chef. In such a case the request can be honored or rejected, and this type of situation I'd say may be more similar to a baker being asked to bake a custom cake. It's imperfect, since the restaurant isn't in the business of offering dishes made up by the customers, but still it's the one situation in a restaurant where I could see it being a special service.

Rather than worry about who believes what in order to define what can and can't be refused, would it not merely be simpler to suggest that anyone can refuse special services for any reason? Even if this means including bad reasons in there (racism, sexism, etc.) is that perhaps not preferable to instituting a type of slavery where a customer can command a person to do a thing and they must do it?
« Last Edit: November 24, 2016, 03:06:27 PM by Fenring »

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #180 on: November 24, 2016, 03:15:10 PM »
Quote
I think what Al...sorry, Kasandra (with one S) is getting at is "where is the line" dividing services offered from goods sold. Of course, I'm sure this line of reasoning is meant to demonstrate that since the line may be undefined at present that therefore there should be no line and therefore no religious grounds to decline to offer services.
That misses the point: If there is a line, show it.  If there's no line, don't arbitrarily draw one separating things based on a personal preference.

Quote
The different case could be where a person goes into a restaurant and tries to order something not on the menu, knowing it's within the technical capability of the chef. In such a case the request can be honored or rejected, and this type of situation I'd say may be more similar to a baker being asked to bake a custom cake. It's imperfect, since the restaurant isn't in the business of offering dishes made up by the customers, but still it's the one situation in a restaurant where I could see it being a special service.
Again, that misses the point: Does the bakery sell a cake with writing on it that says "Congratulations, Tom and Harry!"?  Does the baker buy the cake and keep in the storeroom until someone comes along to order it?  I can analogize every step in the cake baking process with a chef cooking a meal to order. They both start with a recipe and ingredients and the person who orders asks for personalized or special touches.  If a baker can discriminate because of sexual orientation, so can a chef.  OTOH, someone providing a service would correspond more to the waiter or order taker at the bakery. You shouldn't expect them to impose their own religious or moral view on both the company/store they work for and the customer.  The same goes for a pharmacist or a county clerk in Kentucky or elsewhere.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #181 on: November 24, 2016, 03:29:46 PM »
OTOH, someone providing a service would correspond more to the waiter or order taker at the bakery. You shouldn't expect them to impose their own religious or moral view on both the company/store they work for and the customer.  The same goes for a pharmacist or a county clerk in Kentucky or elsewhere.

Well I did make the distinction between a standard service and a custom one. A waiter takes all orders; that's his job. If a baker only makes standard products (like all the loaves, desserts, etc. you see in a typical bakery) then there's no issue. But if part or all of the baker's business involves making custom products, then yes, I do think that's different from other kinds of services.

That being said I agree with you that someone providing an incidental service (such as a waiter, cashier, clerk, etc.) should have no business imposing their personal beliefs on a customer unless they are merely enforcing a rule passed down by the establishment. If the owner is also the waiter then that changes things somewhat, but even so that merely reverts the conversation back to whether a standard or custom service is being offered.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #182 on: November 24, 2016, 11:49:43 PM »
Quote
I think what Al...sorry, Kasandra (with one S) is getting at is "where is the line" dividing services offered from goods sold. Of course, I'm sure this line of reasoning is meant to demonstrate that since the line may be undefined at present that therefore there should be no line and therefore no religious grounds to decline to offer services.
That misses the point: If there is a line, show it.  If there's no line, don't arbitrarily draw one separating things based on a personal preference.

Quote
The different case could be where a person goes into a restaurant and tries to order something not on the menu, knowing it's within the technical capability of the chef. In such a case the request can be honored or rejected, and this type of situation I'd say may be more similar to a baker being asked to bake a custom cake. It's imperfect, since the restaurant isn't in the business of offering dishes made up by the customers, but still it's the one situation in a restaurant where I could see it being a special service.
Again, that misses the point: Does the bakery sell a cake with writing on it that says "Congratulations, Tom and Harry!"? 

The line is Assent, Kasandra.  I cannot force my religion on you, not can you use antidiscrimination law to humiliate and impoverish people of a religion you dispose, just because they won't bow to your tin god. 

If what they call marriage is sacred, then assenting to another definition of marriage may blaspheme their religion.  Consider the bureaucrat who refused to personally sign a same sex marriage certificate, but approved a subordinate to validate it. What's the problem here?  There's no fundamental right to force people to force a Jewish food critic to approve a bacon cheeseburger.  These lawsuits are vindictive maliciousand opportunistic. In most cases the plaintiffs never genuinely wanted the service from that individual.  Please. You really think there were no gay friendly photographers in town?

The Heart of Atlanta case responded to a fact set where  lack Americans slept in cars with their kids while traveling because no inn would take them.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #183 on: November 24, 2016, 11:54:38 PM »
Quote
Rather than worry about who believes what in order to define what can and can't be refused, would it not merely be simpler to suggest that anyone can refuse special services for any reason? Even if this means including bad reasons in there (racism, sexism, etc.) is that perhaps not preferable to instituting a type of slavery where a customer can command a person to do a thing and they must do it?

Well said and agreed, provided more clarification of special services.  Legal prostitution, where it exists, should work that way.  I think a fertility medicine should work the same way. No one should be forced against his or her will to help another make babies.  The alternative is court-ordered rape like in Pakistan.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #184 on: November 27, 2016, 08:39:38 AM »
Quote
If what they call marriage is sacred, then assenting to another definition of marriage may blaspheme their religion.  Consider the bureaucrat who refused to personally sign a same sex marriage certificate, but approved a subordinate to validate it. What's the problem here?  There's no fundamental right to force people to force a Jewish food critic to approve a bacon cheeseburger.  These lawsuits are vindictive maliciousand opportunistic. In most cases the plaintiffs never genuinely wanted the service from that individual.  Please. You really think there were no gay friendly photographers in town?
There is much to disagree with in every sentence.

Thus (the bolded part), any service can be denied to anyone for any reason, because somewhere somebody will be offended or their religion blasphemed by almost anything you can think of. 

The bureaucrat in Kentucky refused to let anyone in her office sign the marriage license, even though she was a public servant.  By that token the police don't have to help stop a Muslim from being mugged.

The food critic isn't hired by the restaurant, but chooses where to eat.  If s/he works for a newspaper it's between them to decide what the critic's territory includes.

What about the cases where the plaintiffs genuinely did want the service?  If gay people should look for gay-friendly photographers, should black people look for black-friendly restaurants?

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #185 on: November 27, 2016, 08:45:43 AM »
What about the cases where the plaintiffs genuinely did want the service?  If gay people should look for gay-friendly photographers, should black people look for black-friendly restaurants?

You mean they don't already tend towards doing this? Granted, it's something of a learned trait, but it certainly is a thing that is out there. Or else I'm just imagining that there has been an openly "Gay Bar" operating in my overwhelmingly Mormon hometown since the late 1990's.

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #186 on: November 27, 2016, 09:06:30 AM »
What about the cases where the plaintiffs genuinely did want the service?  If gay people should look for gay-friendly photographers, should black people look for black-friendly restaurants?

You mean they don't already tend towards doing this? Granted, it's something of a learned trait, but it certainly is a thing that is out there. Or else I'm just imagining that there has been an openly "Gay Bar" operating in my overwhelmingly Mormon hometown since the late 1990's.
Do they do that because they won't be served at other bars, or is it because that's where their friends tend to hang out?  I have a favorite bar that I didn't pick because I wasn't welcome elsewhere.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #187 on: November 27, 2016, 09:34:01 AM »
What about the cases where the plaintiffs genuinely did want the service?  If gay people should look for gay-friendly photographers, should black people look for black-friendly restaurants?

You mean they don't already tend towards doing this? Granted, it's something of a learned trait, but it certainly is a thing that is out there. Or else I'm just imagining that there has been an openly "Gay Bar" operating in my overwhelmingly Mormon hometown since the late 1990's.
Do they do that because they won't be served at other bars, or is it because that's where their friends tend to hang out?  I have a favorite bar that I didn't pick because I wasn't welcome elsewhere.

I think it's a little bit of everything honestly. People go and do things to "destress" which means they'll preferentially go to "safe spaces" for lack of a better term(and ignoring other more recent usages) to do so.  Which means Gays will tend to congregate at venues they KNOW as being "Gay Friendly" over others that may be ambiguous at best, or overtly hostile at worst. This also ignores the nature and "quality" of the patrons that a particular venue attracts.

While not one for the bar scene myself(I don't drink), I understand the local "gay bar" back home had a LOT of straight customers as well, as they much preferred "the atmosphere" there over the other more limited local options. (Being an overwhelmingly Mormon community, the Bar scene is rather limited, as most of the population doesn't drink)

That being said, my time in the Navy left me rather jaded on this front, I went in with rather egalitarian ideas about race relations. Then I met reality. People tend to congregate around that which they are familiar and comfortable with. Which means they tend to congregate around people with comparable backgrounds to their own.

And sadly, for most minority groups, that means that skin color is a pretty significant indicator as to "what is your background" so pick a particular ethnic group that any kind of substantial number on board ship(more than 3 or 4), and you'd find that people in that ethnic group would tend to spend most of their time "hanging out" with members of their own ethnicity.

The only real exception to that was the whites, but I think that has a lot to do with the rather wide ranging variability in the backgrounds to be found among White Americans in particular. The other thing in play there is likely to be some of the social engineering that has been going on since the 1960's in terms of drilling it into the minds of white people in particular, that they need to be more open and accepting of people with different skin colors and cultural backgrounds. Reverse racism is a thing, I've experienced it personally, luckily not in a professional context for me. I've seen other racial minorities discriminate against other racial minorities, and the list goes on and on.

It all ultimately boils down to tribalism(/factionalism) in one form or another, whatever the basis of "tribal(faction) identification" may be.

The Gays go to "Gay Bars" because they're known to be reasonably safe for them, and they know they'll find people there who likely have comparable backgrounds to their own, or are otherwise likely to be sympathetic to their situation. (More/better shoulders to cry on while drunk) So in many areas it has nothing to do with the service (not) being offered to them in those venues, it has to do with other "intangibles" instead. Likewise for minorities preferring their respective "ethnic" venues over the ones that "the White People" are going to.

The homophobes and the racists/bigots obviously provide their own "special" kind of negative reinforcement of their preference towards staying away from the standard "(straight/) white" venues, and that is something that does need further curtailment, particularly when it's happening against the wishes of the business owner/management. But even absent such abuses, the natural tendency is going to be for "like to find like" and for them to build their own little communities around whatever their major focus happens to be, be it on racial lines, sexual preferences, other special (medical) circumstances, religious reasons, or simply political preferences. (I recently had a (conservative) family member move to Texas to escape the "liberal madness" in California after getting a job offer there that made the move worthwhile... Of course they moved to Austin, which probably isn't an improvement for them, but anyhow)
« Last Edit: November 27, 2016, 09:39:47 AM by TheDeamon »

Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #188 on: November 27, 2016, 10:54:28 AM »
Quote
I think it's a little bit of everything honestly.
Most likely (and your comments are good), but this discussion is about needing to go elsewhere because service was refused.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #189 on: November 27, 2016, 11:17:06 AM »
Code: [Select]
Thus (the bolded part), any service can be denied to anyone for any reason, because somewhere somebody will be offended or their religion blasphemed by almost anything you can think of.

Straw man or you're disagreeing before you have thought it through. You have an absolute right to blaspheme my religion.  I simply ask you to not use color of law to try to coerce me to blaspheme my own religion, absent national security reasons. No problem making persons who cross the border piss on statues of Baghdadi and Khomeini, since those who regard those monsters as holy men pose in imminent physical threat to national security.  Otoh notices are saved by your insistence that I piss on Christ.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #190 on: November 27, 2016, 11:56:21 AM »
^^^ OYOH NO LIVES are saved by ....

Apologies for the auto-correct/autodestruct snafu

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #191 on: November 27, 2016, 12:36:19 PM »
Quote
The Gays go to "Gay Bars" because they're known to be reasonably safe for them

Gosh, no. The most dangerous homophobes target folks near or in gay bars.

The biggest gay bars provide a different culture partly descended from the 1920s speakeasy culture. So straight people attracted to that culture hang out there too.  When I went to my (gay) boss' birthday party. a greater number of female prostitutes solicited me than ever did in any other Vegas dance establishment. I infer from that that there a lot of straight guys that go there.

 On the other side of the Spectrum are hookup bars with obvious names like "Cruising" and "The Back Door".  (Actual names of two places near my old house in Vegas.). One of my clients worked at TBD, and I take it's not a place that women or straight men ever frequent, but there's anti gay violence in the immediate area.



TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #192 on: November 27, 2016, 01:41:26 PM »
Well, safe being a relative thing. They can vent their spleen within about their homosexual "relationship issues" within that venue without concern about reprisal from the listener for being gay. Now once they leave the bar, the non-patrons are a concern.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #193 on: November 27, 2016, 01:54:36 PM »
Quote
I think it's a little bit of everything honestly.
Most likely (and your comments are good), but this discussion is about needing to go elsewhere because service was refused.

I honestly think the "gay bar" thing is more cultural in nature than refused service. The bartender and wait staff likely doesn't care. The patrons may be another matter however. But I think that's a near universal if you find your way into the right(wrong) bar.

I also think outright refused services is comparatively rare(quality of service is another matter), or many of the (test) cases that have been floated wouldn't be the ones they'd send to court first. Housing discrimination and employment discrimination are probably much more common(but again still fairly rare), all things considered, and those come with their own set of perils.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #194 on: November 27, 2016, 01:59:38 PM »
Another thing I remember is that no male ever hit on me in a gay bar, in contrast to all the times guys hit on me in non gay venues. I can only conclude that gay males act or dress differently in such environments, though I don't know what it was.  Or maybe gaydar just works better there.  LoL.

Another tidbit ... You might be surprised at the number of out of the closet gays don't even know the Leftspeak "LGBT" acronym.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #195 on: November 27, 2016, 03:32:57 PM »
Quote
If what they call marriage is sacred, then assenting to another definition of marriage may blaspheme their religion.  Consider the bureaucrat who refused to personally sign a same sex marriage certificate, but approved a subordinate to validate it. What's the problem here?  There's no fundamental right to force people to force a Jewish food critic to approve a bacon cheeseburger.  These lawsuits are vindictive maliciousand opportunistic. In most cases the plaintiffs never genuinely wanted the service from that individual.  Please. You really think there were no gay friendly photographers in town?
There is much to disagree with in every sentence.

Thus (the bolded part), any service can be denied to anyone for any reason, because somewhere somebody will be offended or their religion blasphemed by almost anything you can think of. 

The bureaucrat in Kentucky refused to let anyone in her office sign the marriage license, even though she was a public servant.  By that token the police don't have to help stop a Muslim from being mugged.

The food critic isn't hired by the restaurant, but chooses where to eat.  If s/he works for a newspaper it's between them to decide what the critic's territory includes.

What about the cases where the plaintiffs genuinely did want the service?  If gay people should look for gay-friendly photographers, should black people look for black-friendly restaurants?

No, nor should gays have to find gay friendly restaurants. No more than a bigoted racist photographer have to commemorate a so called "mixed race" wedding.   Do you really not recognise the artistic freedom difference between a wedding photographer and a Restaurant?  An artist should be able to choose her subject matter, otherwise the first Amendment is trashed.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2016, 03:37:09 PM by Pete at Home »

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #196 on: November 27, 2016, 03:38:54 PM »
While Kasandra sounds familiar, I am confused. I'm hearing Marnie's sociopolitics but Kate's poise and dignity.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #197 on: November 27, 2016, 03:47:10 PM »
Quote
The bureaucrat in Kentucky refused to let anyone in her office sign the marriage license, even though she was a public servant.

Don't know that case but agreed that's wrong.

In the case I heard, she was an elected official, not a bureaucrat, and she was jailed even though she offered to let someone else sign the documents. 

An elected local official making a merely nominal token rejection to a new Supreme Court ruling, is federalism working as designed.  You don't have a right to silence people or force them to bow to the new tin god in town.


Kasandra

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #198 on: November 28, 2016, 07:50:00 AM »
Bureaucrats can be elected to fill a slot in a government organization. She is a functionary, and not even a very glorified one.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions for the Trump Administration as of October 2018
« Reply #199 on: November 28, 2016, 09:36:29 AM »
Bureaucrats can be elected to fill a slot in a government organization. She is a functionary, and not even a very glorified one.

Election implies representation, and unless you are from Kentucky, you have no stake nor say in whether her actions represented the feelings of constituents.  Your analysis assumes totalitarian efficiency and fails to appreciate that the inefficient safety valves of a representative federalist system keep a large country from blowing apart without the mind numbing  might makes right nationalism of Russia or the systematic fact suppression of the People's Republic of China. For Frack sake let it go.  As Mr Burns said, "let the fools have their tar tar sauce.". Left washed suppression of dissent in respectable places is what gave us Trump and the Apt Right.  And as someone recently said, things are going to get worse before they get better.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2016, 09:38:59 AM by Pete at Home »